Login

russian armor

Balance Data Since The Patch

PAGES (16)down
8 Jul 2015, 19:49 PM
#241
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

You can't balance for the fact AT's will always beat randoms in 3v3 and 4v4. There will also be issues so long as the 3v3 and 4v4 maps are utter unrelenting shit because they allow players to win by dog piling 2 VP's.

You can handwring about Axis being OP in 3's and 4's because of this unit and that, but the culprit 99% of the time is the fact Ostheer has excellent defensive tools and when the game is "who can dog pile and entrench the VP fast enough" the faction with the best defensive tools will do the best.



ATs will have an advantage over randoms, especially if the AT has voice chat. But i hope Relic can even out the playing field.

and the points you are bringing up is part of the reason why Axis are so much stronger in these modes. It is difficult to dislodge Elefants, King TIgers, and Jagdtigers, especially on cramped maps like Lanzerath
8 Jul 2015, 19:52 PM
#242
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1



ATs will have an advantage over randoms, especially if the AT has voice chat. But i hope Relic can even out the playing field.

and the points you are bringing up is part of the reason why Axis are so much stronger in these modes. It is difficult to dislodge Elefants, King TIgers, and Jagdtigers, especially on cramped maps like Lanzerath


Which is why I said "maps, maps, maps", none of those units are OP in 1's and 2's because flanking them is possible and they can't cover everything. If the maps in 3's and 4's were bigger and had more VP's you needed to cover it would encourage more mobile play rather than everyone digging in a lobbing arty at each other.

Ever try and harangle a JT around the map? It sucks, it's the JT's biggest weakness which doesn't matter of course it just has to sit in one place forever and never move.
8 Jul 2015, 20:08 PM
#243
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 18:47 PMGdot


They sure are :D

This notion needs to stop. Not only is it untrue, but its giving fodder to newer players to cry balance rather than attempt to do a self evaluation. The perception of balance and actual balance are completely out of whack, IMO. Are there balance issues? Yes. Will there always be balance issues? Yes. Am I losing because of balance? NOOOOOOO.

Balance is not affecting 99% of the 4v4AT games being played. People just want to assume they are losing because of balance; its an easier pill to swallow than looking at ones own faults.

This brings me back to my original point. So when one loses, they say I lost because of balance and therefore what I did during the game was the correct approach and its the game that needs to change and not me. This stifles creativity and learning. This has been one of the most prevelant contributing factors to the toxicity of this community, and the worst part is - its an unwarranted self manifestation.




yea. it doesnt affect 99% of the AT games because most of time the skill gap is noticeable enough for the better team to win without breaking a sweat.

not because somehow top 4v4 AT teams achieved a state of perfect clarity when it comes to balance and therefore somehow evening out the battles whilst for random scrubs, axis is ezmode.
8 Jul 2015, 20:13 PM
#244
avatar of NorthWeapon
Donator 11

Posts: 615

Just a few words to say:

Future COH2 esports tournaments will be 100% balanced for the following reason:
- Both teams will be able to play both Axis & Allies
- Both teams will play on the same maps
- Both teams will have access to the same commanders & factions

and if you wanna go further

- Both teams will have the same bulletins

Problem solved. Think CS:GO. Terrorists & Counter-Terrorists asymmetrically balanced but because you get to play both of them, it's balanced at the end.
8 Jul 2015, 20:20 PM
#245
avatar of AvNY

Posts: 862

You can't balance for the fact AT's will always beat randoms in 3v3 and 4v4. There will also be issues so long as the 3v3 and 4v4 maps are utter unrelenting shit because they allow players to win by dog piling 2 VP's.

You can handwring about Axis being OP in 3's and 4's because of this unit and that, but the culprit 99% of the time is the fact Ostheer has excellent defensive tools and when the game is "who can dog pile and entrench the VP fast enough" the faction with the best defensive tools will do the best.




Changing it so randoms do not match with AT is completely conceivable.

New maps would be beneficial too. The original maps in COH1 were horrid. Hochwald Gap, Achelous, Scheldt (yes, it was automatch once)... just horrid.
8 Jul 2015, 20:21 PM
#246
avatar of AvNY

Posts: 862

Just a few words to say:

Future COH2 esports tournaments will be 100% balanced for the following reason:
- Both teams will be able to play both Axis & Allies
- Both teams will play on the same maps
- Both teams will have access to the same commanders & factions

and if you wanna go further

- Both teams will have the same bulletins

Problem solved. Think CS:GO. Terrorists & Counter-Terrorists asymmetrically balanced but because you get to play both of them, it's balanced at the end.




Esport balance doesn't matter without a playerbase.
8 Jul 2015, 20:24 PM
#247
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 20:21 PMAvNY

Esport balance doesn't matter without a playerbase.


Nope
8 Jul 2015, 20:25 PM
#248
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2


- Both teams will have the same bulletins



Wow, someone thinks bulletins affect balance

8 Jul 2015, 20:28 PM
#249
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

People here are saying AT balance is not the way forward.

So games where people are proficient at making use of each factions pros and cons in a team oriented manner, as opposed to the clusterfuck of 4 random dudes who may nor not be cooperating, is somehow not a good reflection of balance.

Just take a look at that for a second. You literally want to balance around people that are not playing the factions to their proper extent, and ignore those that do.

Hokay.

And NorthWeapon is right, for esports thats technically how it gets "balanced" by playing both sides, though in CSGO certain maps can be extremely one sided and this is where vetoing becomes a competition in its own way. However, in CoH that isn't necessarily perfect as it becomes boring to watch a one sided game, where as in CS the nature of two minute rounds and pistol rounds not really being decided by map balance makes it much more entertaining to watch.

If CoH 2 wants to be a good esport that is entertaining, both sides have to be balanced at an arbitrary number such as 60/40 at a bare minimum.
8 Jul 2015, 20:30 PM
#250
avatar of iTzDusty

Posts: 836 | Subs: 5

Sidenote: Stats this week show 2v2 as having absolutely perfect balance in top 2v2, every faction within a percent.

2v2 for esports confirmed please.
8 Jul 2015, 20:48 PM
#251
avatar of Alexzandvar

Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1

Sidenote: Stats this week show 2v2 as having absolutely perfect balance in top 2v2, every faction within a percent.

2v2 for esports confirmed please.


dw I'm sure the OP will come back to acknowledge he was wrong.
8 Jul 2015, 21:01 PM
#252
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1



yea. it doesnt affect 99% of the AT games because most of time the skill gap is noticeable enough for the better team to win without breaking a sweat.

not because somehow top 4v4 AT teams achieved a state of perfect clarity when it comes to balance and therefore somehow evening out the battles whilst for random scrubs, axis is ezmode.


"The skill gap is noticeable" - so why bring balance into it? Why would it have ANYTHING to do with balance if this is the case.

If you think the high level AT games aren't competitive then you are simply misinformed.

This is the exact disposition I was referring to. You want to throw your hands up and say ez mode (like a whiny pussy) then fine. The truth is you can win as allies and you can be just as successful. Is it possible your strategy was poor and this is why you were not able to achieve a victory?

What would be an alternative, Soup? Would you prefer the game is balanced for random mode players with no experience?

AvNY: This game has a small player base. IT always has had a small player base. You were lucky to find 7 people in competitive match (searching across all game modes) in coh1. It is impossible to find a perfectly balanced skill/lelo match having such a small number of people searching at any given time. Why should a competitive player be punished by waiting 30 minutes when searching for a competitive match making game. Let the casuals play custom.


8 Jul 2015, 21:28 PM
#253
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

People here are saying AT balance is not the way forward.

So games where people are proficient at making use of each factions pros and cons in a team oriented manner, as opposed to the clusterfuck of 4 random dudes who may nor not be cooperating, is somehow not a good reflection of balance.

Just take a look at that for a second. You literally want to balance around people that are not playing the factions to their proper extent, and ignore those that do.

Hokay.



There is basically no way to tell from rankings who in 4v4 AT is anygood at the game or not because getting high ranked is essentially a matter of playing lots of games

So maintain that one should is an odd position to adopt if you purport to believe that the game should be balanced around "Top Players"
8 Jul 2015, 21:28 PM
#254
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 21:01 PMGdot


1. "The skill gap is noticeable" - so why bring balance into it? Why would it have ANYTHING to do with balance if this is the case.

2. If you think the high level AT games aren't competitive then you are simply misinformed.

3. This is the exact disposition I was referring to. You want to throw your hands up and say ez mode (like a whiny pussy) then fine. The truth is you can win as allies and you can be just as successful. Is it possible your strategy was poor and this is why you were not able to achieve a victory?

4. What would be an alternative, Soup? Would you prefer the game is balanced for random mode players with no experience?

...



1. what i was saying is that even most AT games, it is scrub mopping.

2. yeah that statement disgusts me. who said that? not me.

3. i'm sorry that while you were rolling with perhaps the best 3v3 at team, you gained a head size of montana, but i don't think i whined. the chart clearly shows that in 4v4 randoms, axis is ezmode. i was just commenting on your big headness.

4. because most AT v. AT is still very one sided, it would produce result as useless as the one right now in terms of trying to use that specific data to balance 3v3+.

alternative? use other forms of data. i.e. how stug, FHQ or CAS does in 3v3+.
8 Jul 2015, 21:31 PM
#255
avatar of van Voort
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 3552 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 21:01 PMGdot


What would be an alternative, Soup? Would you prefer the game is balanced for random mode players with no experience?



Yes, yes I would. Thank you for noticing


AvNY: This game has a small player base. IT always has had a small player base. You were lucky to find 7 people in competitive match (searching across all game modes) in coh1. It is impossible to find a perfectly balanced skill/lelo match having such a small number of people searching at any given time. Why should a competitive player be punished by waiting 30 minutes when searching for a competitive match making game. Let the casuals play custom.


A Mr Copernicus called and left a message

Apparently the world doesn't revolve around you.


Casuals are what keep the game going
8 Jul 2015, 22:08 PM
#256
avatar of Gdot

Posts: 1165 | Subs: 1



1. what i was saying is that even most AT games, it is scrub mopping.

2. yeah that statement disgusts me. who said that? not me.

3. i'm sorry that while you were rolling with perhaps the best 3v3 at team, you gained a head size of montana, but i don't think i whined. the chart clearly shows that in 4v4 randoms, axis is ezmode. i was just commenting on your big headness.

4. because most AT v. AT is still very one sided, it would produce result as useless as the one right now in terms of trying to use that specific data to balance 3v3+.

alternative? use other forms of data. i.e. how stug, FHQ or CAS does in 3v3+.



1. Yes, the point of the remedy suggested was to use AT vs AT (top 25 for 4v4AT) to show how these teams stack up against one another. These games are often very competitive. What possible data could you gather from the top 200 random where most teams make the top 200 just by completing 10 games? A scaling effect would work on all game modes aside from 1s.

2. my apologies

3. Yes I ride the coat tails of my teammates, have a huge dick, and rightfully so since 4v4AT is the most elite game mode on coh2. YOU ARE COMPARING DATA ON 4v4 RANDOMMMMM. If you need an in depth explanation on why this is a bad idea you can read some of the earlier comments or read what legends' wrote. He himself said this was an inconclusive data set for many reason and planned on a revision.

4. Again, this is why some people suggested using a scaling effect when regarding team games. When top 4v4 teams play the games are often competitive and not one-sided.

The objective is overall balance. Not unit/commander specific. Go try plugging all that information into your data set and see what the results look like. Not to mention how time consuming it would be.

Lets say we do what Vort says, and let the base defenders balance the game. You don't think cruz, ciez, jesulin or any other of the elite upper echelon won't discover a way to be successful and dominate a majority of their opponents? These are the players that have shown the greatest understanding of the game. It is only sensible that we allow them to craft balance. This will give us the greatest chance at achieving overall balance.
8 Jul 2015, 22:58 PM
#257
avatar of pigsoup
Patrion 14

Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 22:08 PMGdot



1. Yes, the point of the remedy suggested was to use AT vs AT (top 25 for 4v4AT) to show how these teams stack up against one another. These games are often very competitive. What possible data could you gather from the top 200 random where most teams make the top 200 just by completing 10 games? A scaling effect would work on all game modes aside from 1s.

2. my apologies

3. Yes I ride the coat tails of my teammates, have a huge dick, and rightfully so since 4v4AT is the most elite game mode on coh2. YOU ARE COMPARING DATA ON 4v4 RANDOMMMMM. If you need an in depth explanation on why this is a bad idea you can read some of the earlier comments or read what legends' wrote. He himself said this was an inconclusive data set for many reason and planned on a revision.

4. Again, this is why some people suggested using a scaling effect when regarding team games. When top 4v4 teams play the games are often competitive and not one-sided.

The objective is overall balance. Not unit/commander specific. Go try plugging all that information into your data set and see what the results look like. Not to mention how time consuming it would be.


2. no prob

3. i wasn't comparing. i was SLIGHTLY insinuating that 4v4 AT axis is also an ezmode. not sure about your dick, but seeing how you called me a whiny pussy, your e-dick is pretty big i'd say.

1&4. i've had 3v3+ AT games where we were supposedly going up against top 10 teams, but it was as easy as beating some random scrubs. opposite is as true as well. lemon, dusty and some rectangle character dude beat us several times like we haven't even played the game before. but somehow i am in many top 25 ranks.

lets assume i am right and axis is ezmode whether random or not. that would've inflated a lot of axis team ranks and that would cause 4v4 top 25 AT only data to look like in fact allies have the edge. and vice versa.

only real way to balance is to have intelligent debates with people with deep knowledge of the 3v3+ game modes, usually top players. of course relic would be there, too. because no matter how exclusive the data becomes in terms of rank filtering, it is not good enough in 3v3+.

-------------------------------------------------------

also, i can't see how axis 3v3+ random being ezmode doesn't translate to axis AT becoming 'easier' mode. sure, allies AT team can coordinate and have better understanding of their units etc etc, but that would be also true for axis AT team.
8 Jul 2015, 23:39 PM
#258
avatar of voltardark

Posts: 971

Matchmaker :

Add an option to be matched vs arranged team only if it's turned on.
(In 2vs2+, a random player should not play vs an arranged team unless he want it)

Add an option to double/triple the match search time to find better matched teammate and opponents.

To level the playing field in 3vs3+ :

SOV : Conscripts should fair a bit better vs sturm pios.
USF : Add stock AT-mines (same as soviet) and a light mortar in t0

All factions :
Decrease air bombing/strafing precision/damage in relation of the target AA cover. (more AA cover mean less precise for bombing and less suppression/damaging strafing)


Plz Don't nerf units rather add more counter options.

Thanks
9 Jul 2015, 02:20 AM
#259
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Jul 2015, 20:20 PMAvNY



Changing it so randoms do not match with AT is completely conceivable.

New maps would be beneficial too. The original maps in COH1 were horrid. Hochwald Gap, Achelous, Scheldt (yes, it was automatch once)... just horrid.


it would be difficult to implement that feature, as good as it sounds. Although 4v4 is most played game mode, the overall playerbase is still fairly small. It already takes a long time to queue as Axis, now imagine screening out all ATs for a pure random-only match. That would take a very long time.

Just a few words to say:

Future COH2 esports tournaments will be 100% balanced for the following reason:
- Both teams will be able to play both Axis & Allies
- Both teams will play on the same maps
- Both teams will have access to the same commanders & factions

and if you wanna go further

- Both teams will have the same bulletins

Problem solved. Think CS:GO. Terrorists & Counter-Terrorists asymmetrically balanced but because you get to play both of them, it's balanced at the end.


This makes sense in 1v1 and 2v2, where the modes seem balanced. However, i don't think this would help that much in 3v3+ where the W/L ratios are very lopsided. I think there are structural issues at play such as faction imbalance, and maps.

9 Jul 2015, 02:24 AM
#260
avatar of NinjaWJ

Posts: 2070

People here are saying AT balance is not the way forward.

So games where people are proficient at making use of each factions pros and cons in a team oriented manner, as opposed to the clusterfuck of 4 random dudes who may nor not be cooperating, is somehow not a good reflection of balance.

Just take a look at that for a second. You literally want to balance around people that are not playing the factions to their proper extent, and ignore those that do.


i wouldn't say top 200 players have no idea what they are doing (especially 4v4 allied players). If the top 200 players winrates are so skewed, i think it is fair indicator to say there is some major issues at hand. It could ve maps, units, factions, etc.
PAGES (16)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

316 users are online: 316 guests
1 post in the last 24h
26 posts in the last week
140 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45608
Welcome our newest member, shiaqurantutor
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM